Final answer:
The false statement is that the iconic novel design of the 1960s embraced 'kitsch' and rejected 'Good Design', as this era was actually characterized by the rejection of 'kitsch' and an embrace of functional simplicity, closely aligned with Bauhaus principles and endorsed by designers like Dieter Rams and Hans Gugelot.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that is FALSE in regard to the famous icon of novel design in the 1960s is: "It embraced 'kitsch' and rejected the 'Good Design' trend in Germany in the 1960s." The design concepts of the 1960s, particularly in the context of the Bauhaus movement and designers like Dieter Rams, Hans Gugelot, and institutions such as Gute Form, actively rejected 'kitsch' in favor of functional simplicity, aesthetic sobriety, and the harmony between form and function. The Bauhaus influence led to a design revolution that emphasized rationality and functionality, which manifest in products that were both industrially feasible and artistically significant.
Dieter Rams and Hans Gugelot were notable figures of the time who adopted industrial materials and the geometric clarity influenced by the Bauhaus in their product designs, which includes examples like Dieter Rams's iconic functionalist approach to consumer product design. This approach was widely praised for rejecting the ornamental excesses of 'kitsch' and aligning with Bauhaus principles that were gestated well before and during the existence of the Bauhaus school, founded by Walter Gropius after World War I. Designers continued this tradition, valuing the integration of art and industry and the idea that everyday items could also be seen as art pieces while maintaining their functionality.